Etymology:No.car.di.op.si.da’ce.ae.N.L. fem. n.Nocardiopsis, type genus of the family; L. fem. pl. n. suff.-aceae, ending to denote a family; N.L. fem. pl. n.Nocardiopsidaceae, the Nocardiopsis family
Valid publication:
Rainey FA, Ward-Rainey N, Kroppenstedt RM, Stackebrandt E. The genus Nocardiopsis represents a phylogenetically coherent taxon and a distinct actinomycete lineage: proposal of Nocardiopsaceae fam. nov. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1996; 46:1088-1092. 🇩🇪
IJSEM list:
Anonymous. Notification list. Notification that new names and new combinations have appeared in volume 46, part 4 of the IJSB. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1997; 47:243-244.
Nomenclatural status:
validly published under the ICNP
Rainey et al. 1997
Stackebrandt E, Rainey FA, Ward-Rainey NL. Proposal for a new hierarchic classification system, Actinobacteria classis nov. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 1997; 47:479-491. 🇩🇪
Anonymous. Notification list. Notification that new names and new combinations have appeared in volume 47, part 2 of the IJSB. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1997; 47:917-919. Notes:
⊖ Emendation accompanied by the removal of 1 genus from the family.
🧍 Complete authorship reads: Rainey, Ward-Rainey and Stackebrandt.
Zhang et al. 1998
Zhang Z, Wang Y, Ruan J. Reclassification of Thermomonospora and Microtetraspora. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1998; 48:411-422. 🇸🇬
Anonymous. Notification list. Notification that new names and new combinations have appeared in volume 48, part 2 of the IJSB. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1998; 48:633-634. Notes:
⊕ Emendation accompanied by the inclusion of 2 genera in the family.
😢 The terminology used by the authors is in line with many other taxonomic studies and does not negatively affect their main results; some improvements may nevertheless be possible. Contrasting the term "chemotaxonomic" with "phenotypic" is not recommended. Whether taxa can have "members" is debatable. See the LPSN phylogeny page for details.
Zhi et al. 2009
Zhi XY, Li WJ, Stackebrandt E. An update of the structure and 16S rRNA gene sequence-based definition of higher ranks of the class Actinobacteria, with the proposal of two new suborders and four new families and emended descriptions of the existing higher taxa. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2009; 59:589-608. 🇨🇳
Euzeby JP. Notification list. Notification that new names and new combinations have appeared in volume 59, part 3 of the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2009; 59:1259-1261. Notes:
⊕ Emendation accompanied by the inclusion of 3 genera in the family.
⊖ Emendation accompanied by the removal of 1 genus from the family.
Notes:
🧕 Zhang et al. (1998) assigned this family to the suborder Streptosporangiineae corrig. Ward-Rainey et al. 1997.Publication:
Zhang Z, Wang Y, Ruan J. Reclassification of Thermomonospora and Microtetraspora. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1998; 48:411-422. 🇸🇬
🧕 Zhi et al. (2009) assigned this family to the suborder Streptosporangiineae corrig. Ward-Rainey et al. 1997.Publication:
Zhi XY, Li WJ, Stackebrandt E. An update of the structure and 16S rRNA gene sequence-based definition of higher ranks of the class Actinobacteria, with the proposal of two new suborders and four new families and emended descriptions of the existing higher taxa. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2009; 59:589-608. 🇨🇳
🧒 Zhang et al. (1998) assigned the genus Nonomuraea corrig. Zhang et al. 1998 to this family.Publication:
Zhang Z, Wang Y, Ruan J. Reclassification of Thermomonospora and Microtetraspora. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1998; 48:411-422. 🇸🇬
🧒 Zhang et al. (1998) assigned the genus Nonomuria Zhang et al. 1998 to this family.Publication:
Zhang Z, Wang Y, Ruan J. Reclassification of Thermomonospora and Microtetraspora. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1998; 48:411-422. 🇸🇬
🚃 The type genus of this family has alternatively been placed in the family Nocardiopsaceae Rainey et al. 1996.Publication:
Stackebrandt E, Rainey FA, Ward-Rainey NL. Proposal for a new hierarchic classification system, Actinobacteria classis nov. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 1997; 47:479-491. 🇩🇪
💁 Taxonomists who have recently focused on this group are the corresponding authors of Li et al. (2003), Chang et al. (2012), Zhang et al. (2013). Editors in search of reviewers are advised to consider additional criteria such as whether a taxon is covered by one of the ICSP subcommittees.
😢 The terminology used by the authors is in line with many other taxonomic studies and does not negatively affect their main results; some improvements may nevertheless be possible. Contrasting the term "chemotaxonomic" with "phenotypic" is not recommended. The usage of the term "coherent taxon" (or equivalent) is cautioned against. Whether taxa can have "members" is debatable. See the LPSN phylogeny page for details.Publication:
Göker M. What can genome analysis offer for bacteria? In: Bridge P, Smith D, Stackebrandt E (eds), Trends in the systematics of bacteria and fungi, CAB International, Wallingford, 2021, p. 255-281. 🇬🇧
🧬 The phylogenomic assignment score of this taxon is -0.03343 (N = 17).
🎰 The BRCs most frequently used for deposits in this group are: DSM: 87; JCM: 72; NBRC: 33; KCTC: 28; CCTCC: 23; IFO: 20; CGMCC: 20; VKM: 19; NRRL: 18; ATCC: 16.
🧍 Orthographical correction conducted in Judicial Opinion 116.Publication:
Arahal et al. Judicial Opinion No. 122. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72:5481.
Subdivision:
Number of child taxa with a validly published and correct name: 14 Number of child taxa with a validly published name, including synonyms: 14 Total number of child taxa: 16
Assigned by:
Goodfellow M. Order XV. Streptosporangiales ord. nov. In: Goodfellow M, Kämpfer P, H.-J. B, Trujillo ME, K.-I. S, Ludwig W, Whitman WB (eds), Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, 2nd edn, vol. 5 (The Actinobacteria), part B, Springer, New York, 2012, p. 1805. 🇬🇧
Linking:
To permanently link to this page, use https://doi.org/10.83108/rn.29686Link copied to clipboard
Record number:
29686
×
Support LPSN
Please sign and share this petition calling for caution before changing bacterial names in databases.